Not SAS. 'Tis be Ozzie's TAG. Not sure if they are part of the SASR.

BTW, V6 already? Hot damn!

Why does everyone seem surprised that our Navy boys did a good job?

Its not like they haven't done it before. Remember a few years back when there were a lot of piracy reports in the Malacca straits? Why do you think its almost unheard of now?

Of course they were not armed like the somali ones are, but still. Pirates are pirates. They all get taken down by the ninjas. Yes, I said it. Deal with it.

Why is that? Not enough manpower to spare in the SASR?

Wearing t-shirt and long pants only also operator look wat. All you need to do is wear a shemagh and grow a bushy beard. Voila! You've been tacticooled.

Also, the stinging pain as well as post battle welts you get is much more satisfying.

That is incorrect. Hearing protection has many types, from simple foam to electronically aided headsets.

Stuffing your ears with foam or any noise absorbing material will block EVERY level of sound, from a .22 caliber shot to an explosion from a frag grenade. However, it will also block sounds from the environment around you. Basically, if you can't hear anything, you can't damage your hearing.

Electronic hearing protection headsets available nowadays are smart enough to block any dangerous decibel levels but will not restrict sounds from your environment. There are some non-electronic hearing plugs that can do the same thing but not as effectively.

Radar warning receivers will only detect the radar signatures emitted by fighters and/or radar based missiles (active or semi active homing). They will not detect any infrared homing (heat seeking) missiles.

Currently, there is no technology that can detect IR homing missiles. This is mostly done by visual and if detected early enough, can be defeated by deploying flares, some fancy maneuvers and luck. There are IR jammers technology which basically tries to overwhelm the missile's homing sensors by projecting an intense IR image. Most modern IR homing missiles have been designed to actually adapt and track this image instead. Which basically means that the IR jammer actually helps with tracking the target.

The only aircraft that has been proven to be able to outrun a surface to air, anti aircraft missile was the SR-71 blackbird. In fact, during a mission, the standard evasive maneuver when a SAM launch was detected is to simply speed up or increase altitude, depending on the type of missile launched. However, some modern high altitude SAMs are capable of Mach 4 or faster, which is more then the SR-71's top speed of Mach 3.2.

No, the antilaser is the opposite of what a laser does. Instead of generating light beams, it extinguishes it.

They had to improvise when the breach didn't go off. Remember Murphy's law; If anything can go wrong, will go wrong.

Kudos to the guy providing cover whilst standing on the ramp of the pickup truck. He maintained his stance even when the truck was moving. Not an easy thing to do.

Here's another example of Murphy's law. Again, the breach didn't do its job properly:



The first guy in got shot 17 times. He survived.

Edited: Wrong law.

This post has been edited by DeFaeco: Mar 8 2011, 10:03 AM

Haha, my bad. It is Murphys law.

How does using the MP5 make the Malaysian SF poor? Many SF units still favor the MP5 due to its size that fits perfectly in close quarters.

The MP7, as impressive as it may be, was not popular because it uses a unique, non-NATO standard cartridge.

Some SF teams have chosen to switch to M4 CQBR (an M4 with a much shorter barrel) due to the extra punch it delivers. This is because body armor have become more common, even to the bad guys.

In a CQB environment, you can wear any type of armor you want but getting shot in the face will still kill you. This is why SF teams practice the Mozambique drill (2 shots to the torso, 1 to the head).

Well, if you want to use that kind of logic, why not just use the .50 beowulf?

Not only will you kill the target, you'll take out the guy standing behind him and also the fellow in the room next door. Heck, maybe even the guy who was standing outside the building when the shot was fired.

Heh. Say what you want bout them plastic guns, heavy ain't one of them.

Humvee's and any other armored vehicles do not belong in the terrains of Afghanistan.

Why don't they belong? Because all those armor plating make them heavy and slow. Which means they can only travel on certain roads/paths.

Why is that significant? Because there is only a handful of roads/paths in Afghanistan. Which makes them predictable. Which makes them vulnerable to IED's/ambushes.

Humvee's and armored vehicles have uses in certain situations, such as when conducting urban operations. They do not work well in sandy/muddy/hilly terrain. Unless, of course if they take out all the extra armor plating. This kinda defeats the purpose of bringing a humvee in the first place.

The same principle applies to the soldiers. I do not understand why they insist on wearing body armor when conducting foot patrol. All that weight slows them down and make it impossible to cross certain terrain. This makes their patrol route predictable and of course, vulnerable to planned attacks.

If you're talking about the southern part of Afghanistan, yes, the patrols are mostly done on vehicles due to relatively flat terrain.

However, this brings back to my point. Those heavy armored vehicles can only be used on certain roads/path which can easily be used against them.

As for the northern parts of Afghanistan, patrols are done on foot due to the mountainous terrains, not accessible by vehicles.

As for body armor, certain scenarios would be beneficial, such as close proximity engagements in an urban terrain. It would also be acceptable when on a vehicle patrol.

However, when wearing it on a foot patrol covering hundreds of miles of harsh terrain? That's just silly. The average grunt in Afghanistan carries over 100 - 150 pounds of equipment. Compare that to an average insurgent, which is about 30-40 pounds consisting of a rifle, ammo, food and water.

More weight means more energy used. The soldiers would get exhausted, which drains morale, which reduces their combat effectiveness. They would also be unable to pursue enemy combatants. Heck, the insurgents could probably even carry their wounded and still be able to outrun the encumbered soldiers.

I've read news about units that was eventually surrounded and overrun due to their inability to outrun their pursuers. Instead of a tactical withdrawal, they are forced to dig in (due to the speed advantage of their attackers) and fight it out, relying heavily on either indirect fire or air support. This is fine if you can keep the enemy siege at a distance. But, if they manage to close the gap, you are screwed.

Nope. The bogey already landed so that's considered a ground target.

The RMP follows the UK tradition of saluting by showing the palm aka the gentleman's salute. Apparently this was done in the old days to show the person that you are saluting that one is not holding a weapon and has no hostile intentions.

I'm not sure why MAF salutes using the palm down method but in the UK, the Royal navy uses this because in the old days, sailors tend to get their hands dirty with grease while performing duties on ships. So, as a symbol of respect to the higher ranks, they salute with the palm down so as not to reveal their dirty hands.

Have you guys seen the picture in NST showing the new batch of M4's SME will be manufacturing for the RMP and MAF?

I may be mistaken but it looks like the new Colt M4 LE6940. Comes with Colt's piston based monolithic upper receiver. Some say the best M4 variant produced by Colt.

Looks awesome. Can't say the same about that awful front grip, though.

Oh god, here we go again. Please, please, PLEASE do not feed the troll. Keep this thread containing useful information only, please.

That's because you only see the what's in the present. What about the future?

Keep in mind that merely 30 years ago we were at war with the communist party. 50 years ago we were at war with Indonesia. 70 years ago we were at war with Japan.

What about 30 years from now? Or 50? Or 70? Can you see the future and what's in store for us? Do we need to wait until foreign troops have landed on our soil before we start to arm ourselves?

It's not about being paranoid. It's about being ready. I'd rather we be over prepared rather then get caught with our pants down.

“The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.” - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Wait a minute. I thought you already retired after that Burma fiasco and went back home in Arizona?

Btw, cool story bro.